Bobby_2021

You can easily argue that no justification is sufficient for any wars at all. I think he is reasonable enough. I would do the same, more or less. How many sovereign states did the US invade in the last 20 years? How many of your presidents were war criminals? You guys have no moral high ground to counter Putin.

Every statement you make in language is a violation of absolute Truth.

Is he going to run for president from prison?

Yeah most Americans don't have enough IQ to understand this kind of stuff. They would rather have some liberal crap shoved down their throat. But I didn't see how this was relevant to the question. None of these things gives him the right to invade a nation. But his justifications are worth hearing. He is entitled to invade if he is threatened by it.

Why is he lecturing us on history.

To be fair the sanctions did work. US actually wanted Russian oil to stay in the market. Which is why they didn't outright ban it but merely introduced a price cap. This ultimately means that the profits will stay with India instead of Russia while not significantly increasing the demand for oil worldwide. That was a masterclass from the US. But by now, Russia should have found a way to bypass the price caps. But their economy is doomed. My point is that US/NATO are not saints that we should give them moral high ground.

I wouldn't walk on the streets if there is 50% chance of getting hit, which is the same rate at which divorces happen. The problem is with the legal system and society which exploits men for all the good they do and gets nothing in return. The problem is not with women. And marriage has no validity these days more than a legal binding which gives room for the govt to deal with your personal stuff. It's a patriarchal idea unfit for the modern world.

It's clear that US/NATO blew up the NS pipeline. But they will never admit it.

I am at unitive stage of awareness. I transcended the use of language to make sense of reality. Today I wholly accept that you can't make sense of reality using language. Language is reality and you can't use one part of reality to make sense of another part of reality. At best you can mimic one part of reality to look like the other part and that's the best you can do. Linguistic understanding is a fallacy. All statements are a fallacy. The only correct statement is the mind of God itself. If you choose to use your intellectual mind instead of the mind of God, then you will run in circles while missing what's right infront of your nose. Your intellectual mind takes 10 steps to complete what could have been done in 2 steps by the unitive mind. You will massively cut out the bullshit by thinking in reality itself without using language. Language is bloat. You don't need to use it to make sense of reality.

All sides use propaganda. So don't make it a huge deal when one side does it. One side can be more conscious. But that doesn't make the propaganda any more truthful. Only time will reveal the truth.

I still don't understand how memory and sleep works. Kinda twisted.

English is a wild language. It's ambiguity is it's beauty. You can craft poetic lines with English which might not be possible with Chinese. Not only can you use many words to describe one thing, but one word can have many meanings depending upon the context. For example the word "set" have 180 different meanings depending upon the context. So English leaves a lot to the context to decipher the meaning of it's content. I think it's thought provoking and beautiful. I also like Sanskrit and Chinese. Should learn them one day. Language by itself is a mysterious thing.

@Leo Gura Leo how often do you see ambitious people not making it in life? How are they supposed to live if none of their ambitions became fruitful? Go back to being a slave? That would be terrible. The other option is to perish trying eternally.

You are not typing on the keyboard. A human being is typing on some keyboard on a phone. It's not your phone. It's not your keyboard. There is no one perceiving phone or keyboard. It's happening. Just that there is no Ego you. You are the phone and the keyboard and everything within your perception. It's not yours. You are it.

👍👍

Being a billionaire should never be the goal. That an entire different ball game. I would be comfortable at 50-100 million dollars. That's the sweet spot. Realistically, even 10 million should be enough. But until then, your quality of life depends a lot on how much money you have. Note than poor people are even more miserable and depressed. On top of a shitty psychology they are poor, barely even being able to buy healthy food or a doctor. A lot of the problems people suffer from are due to a shitty psychology. Most of the people walking around have shitty psyches. Just because money is not a solution doesn't mean not having money would solve anything either.

I know it's a bad to move to have sex with employees as a boss. But, is the sheer extent of power enough to nullify her consent? Given that she fully gave consent at the time. It's almost as if any woman can simply change her mind later as if consent wasn't given at the time I don't know know much about this Vince case. Just asking in general. Many people say he is guilty and I think so.

Don't marry + routinely break up so that you don't come under common law marriage. Laws are so against men nowadays that it isn't even worth fighting. It's a lost cause and no change is happening anytime soon. Better protect your property on your own.

I also had enough. I am taking a break from this thread as well. Godspeed people.

I am not even kidding. I will not use apple products and not even windows unless I am absolutely forced to. These products are a taint in the civilization of mankind. Although Apple products are great, you cannot use them and also advocate for the dismantling of capitalism. Even Windows abuses their monopoly and msft is valued more than apple now. I would use these unless I am absolutely denied all other options. Use Linux. ♥️ Fight Climate Change. ♥️

Giving them complete Sovereignty would be a mistake since it threatens the security of Israel. Israel needs to exist first. Even for you to criticize it, it has to exist first. Giving away the occupied places is giving away control of land of great strategic value. It's a complicated scenario. How much is Israel's occupation balancing security and oppression? I don't know. But I wouldn't demand complete liberation of occupied territories.

You all are trying to draw parallels with Nazi Germany, colonial British India and the American Invasion of Afghanistan. Nazi Germany did genocide amidst war. British India was a colonial rule amidst war. And Afghan was invaded by America amidst their war ln terror. Genocide, is not happening here. Colonization, isn't happening here. Invasion isn't happening here. War is definitely happening here and so as occupation from Israel and terrorism from Gaza. Let's not argue over this. What's happening in Israel-Gaza is more akin to the border disputes over contested land which is far too common across countries. This situation is just a bit more complicated due to the unique geopolitical condition in the middleast.

If this is true, then their entire narrative collapses. Brilliant explanation.

If resistance is in the form of raping & killing Israeli women and taking many more civilians as hostage ,then terrorism is indeed the right label. Doing such barbaric acts in a different country would easily be enough grounds for provocation of war with that country. That is what is happening. War. Not resistance. Not genocide. War. When you declare war, for whatever reasons, you should be prepared to fight it. It's right to say hamas invited a war with Israel and the civilians are paying the price for it.

Of course Israel is an apartheid state that shouldn't be allowed to continue in the same way it functions as of now. Some international body should monitor human rights in gaza while Israel maintain control and administration of the entire region. This is my take. If you don't want Israel to take administration, then clean the place of global terror organizations. That would be nice. Indians used the non violence & non cooperation to protest against the British rule, so I don't think that's applicable here in this situation. However if the British can do superior administration of the region while funding India at the same time, I have no problem since they would be a net addition to the economy. I am not going to define terrorism for you. There are designated terrorist groups operating in the area. It should be easy to identify one when you see it. I don't think they will exist soon, atleast in the Gaza strip. Please don't use the genocide argument. It's war.